On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Sandy McArthur posted on Thu, 01 Aug 2013 17:18:50 -0400 as excerpted:
>
>> While exploring some btrfs maintenance with respect to defragmenting I
>> ran the following commands:
>>
>> # filefrag /path/to/34G.file /path/to/5.7G.
Sandy McArthur posted on Thu, 01 Aug 2013 17:18:50 -0400 as excerpted:
> While exploring some btrfs maintenance with respect to defragmenting I
> ran the following commands:
>
> # filefrag /path/to/34G.file /path/to/5.7G.file
> /path/to/34G.file: 2406 extents found
> /path/to/5.7G.file: 572 exten
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 05:18:50PM -0400, Sandy McArthur wrote:
> While exploring some btrfs maintenance with respect to defragmenting I
> ran the following commands:
>
> # filefrag /path/to/34G.file /path/to/5.7G.file
> /path/to/34G.file: 2406 extents found
> /path/to/5.7G.file: 572 extents found
While exploring some btrfs maintenance with respect to defragmenting I
ran the following commands:
# filefrag /path/to/34G.file /path/to/5.7G.file
/path/to/34G.file: 2406 extents found
/path/to/5.7G.file: 572 extents found
Thinking those mostly static files could be less fragmented I ran:
# btrfs